People v. Sacco CA2/4

── People v. Sacco CA2/4 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 04, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/4/26 P. v. Sacco CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR THE PEOPLE, B350634 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GA113590) v. EUGENE L. SACCO, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Rita L. Badhan, Judge. Affirmed. Gressley & Donaldson, Lara Gressley, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Idan Ivri and David A. Wildman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.  INTRODUCTION Defendant Eugene L. Sacco was charged with a series of financial crimes involving opening bank accounts under false pretenses and taking money belonging to a local post of the American Legion. Sacco moved for mental health diversion under Penal Code section 1001.36,1 supported by an assessment report from a psychologist. The trial court denied Sacco’s motion. The court found that although Sacco had been diagnosed with a “mental disorder” (§ 1001.36, subd. (b)(1)), the evidence rebutted the presumption that the mental disorder was a factor in the offenses (id., subd. (b)(2)). Sacco pled no contest to one count of grand theft. On appeal, Sacco contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for mental health diversion, arguing that the court applied the wrong legal standard and the court’s finding was not supported by substantial evidence. We find no error, and therefore affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Alleged crimes The People charged Sacco with five counts: 1. identity theft of the personal information of Carmen S. 2 on August 24, 2016 (§ 530.5, subd. (a)); 2. forgery on August 24, 2016 (§ 470, subd. (b); 3. 1. identity theft of the personal information of Carmen S. on February 17, 2017 (§ 530.5, subd. (a)); 4. identity theft of the 1 All undesignated section references are to the Penal Code. 2 We refer to the individual victim by first name to protect her privacy. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.90(b)(4).) 2 personal information of American Legion Post 13 on December 3, 2018 (§ 530.5, subd. (a)); and 5. grand theft of $11,534.08 from American Legion Post 13 between December 6, 2018 and July 12, 2019 (§ 487, subd. (a)). At the preliminary hearing, Aaron Ward, a financial crimes investigator for the California Attorney General’s Office, testified that he investigated a report from American Legion Post 13. His investigation revealed the following. Post 13 was receiving mail that had already been opened, and believed it was not receiving “all of the revenue that it was due.” Members of Post 13 suspected Sacco was behind these issues. Post 13 occupied the top floor of a building on North Marengo Avenue in Pasadena. The bottom floor of the building consisted of five offices that were rented out as a source of revenue for Post 13. Sacco rented one of the offices. Sacco was not a member of Post 13; all members must be veterans, and Sacco was not. Post 13’s chief financial officer (CFO) reported a missing check from a deceased member of Post 13, Michael Drysdale. In 2019, the CFO learned that Drysdale had died and, through his trust, had left a gi